“Whats interesting here is that Nickel77 made these comments in late Oct of 2010. If I recall the "magic" day of Nov 10, 2010, an unusual amount of volume was sold and drove the price down. Then when the market closed at 4pm, Liberty disclosed the news in a news release about the "leaving Liberty". Now we see what really happened”.
Tantallon,
Until I read your comments above, I hadn’t thought much about it, nor did I really care what Gary sold, as he was no longer with the company. As much respect as I have for Gary, I purchased my shares on the belief in the prospects of the property; and to this day, still believe the LBE properties in the Shaw Dome have great potential ahead.
If I was let go by a company I had put all my heart and soul into, I probably would have taken similar action as Gary. Why would one want to be associated with a company you were just let go from? You say an unusual amount of volume was sold and drove the price down that day. I looked back and think the price had dropped some .03 cents. What I found more striking in your comment was the fact that the market on LBE was open and trading the entire day you talk about.
I looked up and found that National Instrument NI 51-102 states very clearly that a material change such as that of a senior management change must be disclosed immediately. I don’t think “immediately” means waiting while a full day of trading goes by. If the stock is still trading after one was let go, then obviously one would have to conclude or assume that all relevant news was out; whether it was a press release stating Gary was let go, or the stock being halted.
If Gary had been let go before this trading day, I would then have to say that the LBE management that had let him go had failed miserably in their obligation to put out an immediate press release as required by the regulation authority of the exchange. Do you think it would be Gary’s responsibly to put out his own press release? That would be ridiculous. In my opinion, LBE could be at great fault to have not put out a press release before trading, or at the very least, have halted the stock until the release came out.
The question to be looked at is; was he let go before this trading day? If he was and the stock was still trading the next day, then it is only reasonable to assume the company had taken care of their obligation to inform the regulatory bodies. As trading continued that day it would also be reasonable to assume that Gary had every right to sell what he wanted expecting that the company had done what was required of them.
I don’t really know what happened Tantallon, but I am sure it will all come out down the way. Since you seem to be posting that you know “what really happened”, why don’t you share it with us.
Best
Nickel
